Scaleless BP

Old people wrinkles? Looks like a shaved body part to me lol
:please:Forgive that last comment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I'm probably gonna' get crushed for this, but here goes....

I would not breed this BP. Color morphs are one thing, but this is a serious defect. No different than an Albino born without eyes....don't see a lot of people lining up to make more of those. Now I know there's a school of thought that says all color morphs are defects as well, because they don't look like a Normal. Not a school of thought that I subscribe to, but I'm sure that arguemnt will be brought up.

To me a BP born without scales or heat pits is the same as a human born with flippers...it just ain't right.

Having said all that, I have no doubt someone will breed this little freak, provided it's not sterile (one can always hope), and people will line up to pay stupid amounts of money for them. To each their own...you won't have to stand in line behind me to buy one.

---

I wouldn't try to crush you for stating your opinion. I disagree with you but that's fine. I know this morph is probably not for everyone. Are you ok with people breeding Spiders?

I dont know how i feel about spiders either >.< But do they actually know what causes it yet?

im just a bighippy >.<

I'm not sure why everyone gets all upset with this... just to inform everyone, there are scaleless snakes already in some breeders' collections.. they are doing fine, breeding and producing babies... what does this mean? It means that a scaleless ball python is not likely going to be any different than other scaleless snakes... we are likely going to see animals thrive and reproduce, just like hairless animals and other scaleless reptiles... I can understand not liking them though, I can't stand to look at a hairless guinea pig - yuk! But I personally don't mind the look of this scaleless ball python... the derma ball was ugly in my opinion because it was "half and half" kinda thing...

anyways, just my opinion... and the debate goes on...

Regards,
Bristen.

This is actually a good look at microevolution. It can still breed with a normal ball python, however the difference between it and a normal is glaringly obvious. This is no longer the same as a normal "morph" where the colours are different, this is actually beginning the divergence to an entirely new species. If kept in a different environment than is normal, something that more befits the scaleless nature of the snake, who knows what could come from the line (assuming all are kept in the same environment as the others and then inter bred with one another). Heck give it 200 years and 100 generations we may have an example of macroevolution.

^_^ Go go breeding programs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N4S

you just did. :D

---

Comment on the snake I mean, but im breaking that right now in a second

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackcrystal22

I'm not too sure see...
We are scaleless, and we get along fine.
Hairless rats get along fine.
Moles, with virtually no hair, survive fine..

The only thing that would need to be worried about is burning, which shouldn't happen at proper temperatures anyway. It would probably also be fed f/t.
If the animal is healthy, and doesn't have problems without scales, what is wrong with it?

People thought snakes were a 'freak of nature' when they first saw them, I mean come on... how many stories tell of the snake being evil? People tend to fear what they do not understand.

If this snake is not healthy, and cannot survive well and thrive in a proper environment, then I think it should never be bred or produced.
If not, I have no problem with it.

---

you shouldnt compare Mammals to reptiles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N4S

Me and my future wife are going to try and produce a skinless human.

Should be cool. :cool:

---

As long as they can live its ok to some people I guess.

The thing is, it just aint right.

Look at the scaleless Beardie, it has all sorts of problems with getting hurt. Why produce something that has a lesser chance at surviving?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

[...]Look at the scaleless Beardie, it has all sorts of problems with getting hurt. Why produce something that has a lesser chance at surviving?

---

perhaps this is true for the scaleless bearded dragon, I'm not at all aware of this particular animal... however, I haven't heard of this for scaleless snakes... has anyone? From what I gathered, scaleless snakes lived a rather normal "snake" life... was I wrong?

Regards,
Bristen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bristen

perhaps this is true for the scaleless bearded dragon, I'm not at all aware of this particular animal... however, I haven't heard of this for scaleless snakes... has anyone? From what I gathered, scaleless snakes lived a rather normal "snake" life... was I wrong?

Regards,
Bristen.

---

Im just using the beardie example that scaleless reptiles are less than normally hardy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas Dan

This really isn't fair to the mites. I mean without scales.. where is there to hide? Ticks too. They just stand no chance.

I hate these snakes.

---

probably one good point of these snakes

:rage::rage::rage::rage::rage::rolleyes::(:taz::8::mad::O:):banana::weirdface:te ars::rofl::rolleye2::snake::snake::snake::snake:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nixer

i would think it would be very delicate without scales.

---

Its like the same type of concept of brians scaleless ratsnake... It might be delicate, not sure, kinda reminds me of what a crested gecko might feel like...

It is incredibly cute and looks so smooth and soft but I am guessing they aren't going to be as healthy as a normal snake with scales would be...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

Not gonna comment on this one:rage:

---

that was a comment. just sayin'.

Scaleless snakes are just like hairless monkeys ;) or hairless whatever. It's a mutation that causes a change. Completely natural. Everything on this earth came to be as it is by this process, and there's nothing wrong with it. If it makes this animal more fit for survival in its domain, this gene might end up being more prevalent than the one for scaled ball pythons. Since this animal lives in captivity, the selective pressures are different from where its ancestors evolved, and it stands a good chance of being successful in passing on its genes - simply because we like it.

It's the same reason so many pied balls exist nowadays. The bright white color would make them an easy target in the grasslands of West Africa, but they're safely here in our collections and we think they're beautiful, so we make more.

Something that seems irrevocably true is that the angrier something makes you, the less you understand it. Calm down and look at things from multiple viewpoints. We can explain much of what we observe simply by studying it. Some of the more complex processes still evade us, but we're making progress towards grasping all of it. Nothing you can see is unnatural. If it were, it wouldn't be happening :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pfan151

Are you ok with people breeding Spiders?

---

Actually, since you asked, I don't agree with breeding Spiders or any BP with Spider genes, and I don't own one. I don't soap box about Spiders, because I know many, many people enjoy Spiders and Spider crosses. It's just my personal decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morphie

It's a mutation that causes a change. Completely natural. Everything on this earth came to be as it is by this process, and there's nothing wrong with it.

---

Don't make the mistake of confusing a mutation with a genetic defect. Someone born with thalidamide type flippers for arms isn't a mutation, they are defective from a genetic standpoint.

Quote:

---

Don't make the mistake of confusing a mutation with a genetic defect. Someone born with thalidamide type flippers for arms isn't a mutation, they are defective from a genetic standpoint.

---

Dictionary:
mutation
(myū-tā'shən) pronunciation

3. Genetics.
1. A change of the DNA sequence within a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the creation of a new character or trait not found in the parental type.
2. The process by which such a change occurs in a chromosome, either through an alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the DNA coding for a gene or through a change in the physical arrangement of a chromosome.
3. A mutant.

The ball python in question is a mutant (def #3), a result of the event of definition #2: a rearrangement of chromosomes prior to its birth, dealing it a set of alleles that resulted in the inability to form scales, or perhaps a result of definition #1: a change in the sequence of its DNA making the proteins required for scale formation not-viable. Obviously this process could have been interrupted on any part of many pathways.

The organism is viable and stable. It could be considered "defective" because it doesn't have the protective layer over it, but neither do hairless rats, cats, or monkeys, who all do well and thrive in the comfort of a domestic environment.

I am wondering what definitions of 'mutation' and 'genetic defect' you're using that you don't think both are possibly applicable here (even interchangeably). I'm also wondering what course you took (who your teacher was) that gave you this impression...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

Actually, since you asked, I don't agree with breeding Spiders or any BP with Spider genes, and I don't own one. I don't soap box about Spiders, because I know many, many people enjoy Spiders and Spider crosses. It's just my personal decision.

---

I can agree with you on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

you shouldnt compare Mammals to reptiles

---

Why not? According to the theory of evolution mammals evolved from reptiles which had evolved from fish. A scaleless or hairless or featherless animal is but a mutation in genetics which could lead to something new. Mankind decides now what lives and what dies within captivity. Do not argue that it "has a lesser chance at surviving" this is captivity, it isn't about predator and prey or climate, it is the choice of the owner what survives or not.

This is not the same animal as the Derma Ball. Here is a picture I took of the Derma Ball at one of the shows up here last year. Interesting animal but I really did not like the look. Though the feel was interesting. the skin with no scales was kind of satin feeling.
I do like the look of the animal at the begining of this post with no scales at all.
http://jamillsreptiles.com/images/dermaball.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oxylepy

Why not? According to the theory of evolution mammals evolved from reptiles which had evolved from fish. A scaleless or hairless or featherless animal is but a mutation in genetics which could lead to something new. Mankind decides now what lives and what dies within captivity. Do not argue that it "has a lesser chance at surviving" this is captivity, it isn't about predator and prey or climate, it is the choice of the owner what survives or not.

---

Which is exactly why you shouldnt...evolution schmevolution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JAMills

This is not the same animal as the Derma Ball. Here is a picture I took of the Derma Ball at one of the shows up here last year. Interesting animal but I really did not like the look. Though the feel was interesting. the skin with no scales was kind of satin feeling.
I do like the look of the animal at the begining of this post with no scales at all.

---

Lol, only took 4 pages before someone responded to me. haha. Oh well, I hve only seen one picture of theDerma ball. Now that I see that one.. doesn't look that cool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oxylepy

Why not? According to the theory of evolution mammals evolved from reptiles which had evolved from fish. A scaleless or hairless or featherless animal is but a mutation in genetics which could lead to something new. Mankind decides now what lives and what dies within captivity. Do not argue that it "has a lesser chance at surviving" this is captivity, it isn't about predator and prey or climate, it is the choice of the owner what survives or not.

---

Because a Mammal is a Mammal...and a Reptile is a Reptile...

Would you enjoy if you had been born with scales?

Would I have ever known what it would have been like to not have scales? Would I be part of a society that would shun me? Because the snake is neither of those. God you people are thick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas Dan

Lol, only took 4 pages before someone responded to me. haha. Oh well, I hve only seen one picture of theDerma ball. Now that I see that one.. doesn't look that cool.

---

Must have missed my post. :confused: ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

Because a Mammal is a Mammal...and a Reptile is a Reptile...

Would you enjoy if you had been born with scales?

---

Would you enjoy if you had been born with a thick coat of fur? Mammal or reptile, it's still an animal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00kfu

Must have missed my post. :confused: ;)



Would you enjoy if you had been born with a thick coat of fur? Mammal or reptile, it's still an animal.

---

No... I wouldn't...so if I was a reptile I don't think id want to be purposely born without scales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

I'm probably gonna' get crushed for this, but here goes....

I would not breed this BP. Color morphs are one thing, but this is a serious defect. No different than an Albino born without eyes....don't see a lot of people lining up to make more of those. Now I know there's a school of thought that says all color morphs are defects as well, because they don't look like a Normal. Not a school of thought that I subscribe to, but I'm sure that arguemnt will be brought up.

To me a BP born without scales or heat pits is the same as a human born with flippers...it just ain't right.

Having said all that, I have no doubt someone will breed this little freak, provided it's not sterile (one can always hope), and people will line up to pay stupid amounts of money for them. To each their own...you won't have to stand in line behind me to buy one.

---

dido man !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

Not gonna comment on this one:rage:

---

ugh?
why?
its sweet!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

Actually, since you asked, I don't agree with breeding Spiders or any BP with Spider genes, and I don't own one. I don't soap box about Spiders, because I know many, many people enjoy Spiders and Spider crosses. It's just my personal decision.

---

Just curious...

Why don't you agree with breeding spiders? Is there more to the morph than a pattern? New to BPs, just wondering. :)

Because of the wobble. I would imagine that he wouldn't agree with breeding Caramels because of the kink or Womas because of the super's tendency to die as well.

Thanks Oxylepy...I found a thread on it too. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morphie

Dictionary:
mutation
(myū-tā'shən) pronunciation

3. Genetics.
1. A change of the DNA sequence within a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the creation of a new character or trait not found in the parental type.
2. The process by which such a change occurs in a chromosome, either through an alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the DNA coding for a gene or through a change in the physical arrangement of a chromosome.
3. A mutant.

The ball python in question is a mutant (def #3), a result of the event of definition #2: a rearrangement of chromosomes prior to its birth, dealing it a set of alleles that resulted in the inability to form scales, or perhaps a result of definition #1: a change in the sequence of its DNA making the proteins required for scale formation not-viable. Obviously this process could have been interrupted on any part of many pathways.

The organism is viable and stable. It could be considered "defective" because it doesn't have the protective layer over it, but neither do hairless rats, cats, or monkeys, who all do well and thrive in the comfort of a domestic environment.

I am wondering what definitions of 'mutation' and 'genetic defect' you're using that you don't think both are possibly applicable here (even interchangeably). I'm also wondering what course you took (who your teacher was) that gave you this impression...?

---

Never took a course, Morphie, and never had a professor, and never claimed I did.

My understanding of the mutation vice defect are more what I'd call "common man" understandings.

I stand corrected on my understanding of the terms...thanks for the dictionary lesson.

Now, more to the point, I still think a scaleless BP is mutant freak of nature and should not be bred. Don't think I can make is any simpler than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by physalia

Just curious...

Why don't you agree with breeding spiders? Is there more to the morph than a pattern? New to BPs, just wondering. :)

---

Becasue of the nuerological isuess with Spiders and Spider crosses. Again, that is just my personal decision, and have no issue with folks who want to keep Spiders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oxylepy

Because of the wobble. I would imagine that he wouldn't agree with breeding Caramels because of the kink or Womas because of the super's tendency to die as well.

---

I don't think we should be breeding kinked Caramels, but I also think that over time the kinking can be outcrossed. Spiders have not shown a tendency to lose the wobble despite extensive outcrossing.

As for Womas. I love Womas, but wouldn't support further tinkering with the super form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

Becasue of the nuerological isuess with Spiders and Spider crosses. Again, that is just my personal decision, and have no issue with folks who want to keep Spiders.

---

im also the same.

they are lovely to look at and all. and i dont mind other people having them. but personally i will never own one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

No... I wouldn't...so if I was a reptile I don't think id want to be purposely born without scales.

---

isn't this the same as a dog who is born blind or with one eye?? they learn to over come....their hearing gets sharper. i have a shepard/rottie mix and he only has sight in one eye. he has always had his head to the side alil so to over compensate for his disability. only time can tell whether this is a "BAD" trait. until then it is a personal choice to own and breed. to not own etc.

do the "bee"s have the wobble?? bc they are spider crosses im wondering if bumbles, killers etc. have a wobble/

First off, I respect everyone's opinions, and you are all entitled to them.

My personal opinion is this: There is absolutely nothing wrong with a scaleless Ball Python. It may be odd, but there are other snake species that have scaleless specimens that are thriving, so, obviously it's not the first ever scaleless snake freakazoid. It's just the first ever scaleless Ball Python freakazoid :P

I also personally find this snake absolutely beautiful. It's odd, I admit. But I think that's part of the reason why I love it.

If other scaleless snakes are doing perfectly fine, and this one lives a healthy life and lives long enough to hit breeding age and weight, then why not give it a go? Obviously, if there were anything terribly wrong with this mutation, it wouldn't last the three years (if it indeed is a female) till it's safely breedable.

Snake scales aren't hard armor encasings like they are on crocodiles. To me they seem pretty fragile. And like another member pointed out, they do next to nothing to preventing rat bites. They're pretty much just an extra layer of tougher skin to go through before you get to the meat. Like the difference between the skin on the bottom of your feet, and your armpit skin lol.

Btw those hairless cats are called Sphynx's, and they're utterly ugly. But completely natural, and they are loved by many, as well as fully capable of reproducing and living normal (though cold) lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nybp

do the "bee"s have the wobble?? bc they are spider crosses im wondering if bumbles, killers etc. have a wobble/

---

Any snake carrying the Spider gene will have a wobble. It depends on the snake as to the extent. Some are terrible spinners/corkscrewers, some have hardly noticeable wobbles. My Spider's wobble only shows through when she tries to 'periscope' while she's on the move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

Never took a course, Morphie, and never had a professor, and never claimed I did.

...

Now, more to the point, I still think a scaleless BP is mutant freak of nature and should not be bred. Don't think I can make is any simpler than that.

---

And *i* think that the less a person understands how something works, the less willing they should be to form hard-line opinions about it.

(a classic example that you can probably better relate to is non-herpers deciding what the herp-keeping laws should be)

To each their own, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slim

As for Womas. I love Womas, but wouldn't support further tinkering with the super form.

---

Just out of curiosity, why would you not support further attempts? I only ask, because I personally do not believe that this has been attempted very many times. Do you know how many Pearls have been produced? Do you know if any have been produced by crossing two different lines. Do you know if any were produced from very outcrossed stock? I think there are a few things that can be done to attempt to get this homozygous mutation to thrive. I personally will be doing many breedings that have outcomes that are taken as fact, but the data is just not avaiable (i.e. Homozygous Pinstripe, Homozygous Spider, Pearl, Super Pastel x Super Pastel, Caramel x Caramel). My inquiring mind has to see it personally, because I have never believed hear say.

Just my .02,

Coolest thing ever! I'd pay. I'm sad there are no more :(

I don't disagree with the definition but how you chose to interpret it. Short of a serious dna study in a lab that specializes in it. There is NO way to determine what sort of changes took place here.

[QUOTE=Morphie;971264]Dictionary:
mutation
(myū-tā'shən) pronunciation

3. Genetics.
1. A change of the DNA sequence within a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the creation of a new character or trait not found in the parental type.
2. The process by which such a change occurs in a chromosome, either through an alteration in the nucleotide sequence of the DNA coding for a gene or through a change in the physical arrangement of a chromosome.
3. A mutant.
Definition of mutant. A mutant is an individual, organism, or new genetic character arising or resulting from an instance of mutation, which is a base-pair sequence change within the DNA of a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the creation of a new character or trait not found in the wild type. The natural occurrence of genetic mutations is integral to the process of evolution. The study of mutants is an integral part of biology, by understanding the effect that a mutation in a gene has it is possible to establish the normal function of that gene. In some organisms mutants can be created by gene targeting to asses the function of any given gene. This experimental approach is called reverse genetics. For example, a collection of knockout moss mutants can be used to identify genes with so far unknown functions.

Under this definition, all morphs are a form of a mutation, are they not?


The ball python in question is a mutant (def #3), a result of the event of definition #2: a rearrangement of chromosomes prior to its birth, dealing it a set of alleles that resulted in the inability to form scales, or perhaps a result of definition #1: a change in the sequence of its DNA making the proteins required for scale formation not-viable. Obviously this process could have been interrupted on any part of many pathways.

The organism is viable and stable. It could be considered "defective" because it doesn't have the protective layer over it, but neither do hairless rats, cats, or monkeys, who all do well and thrive in the comfort of a domestic environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pfan151

Exactly what I believe as well. It would be interesting to try to feed it an unheated room temp FT rat and see if there is a difference in feeding response with a heated up rat. I would think that would put the heat pit issue to rest one way or the other.

---

Doubt that would work well, I get a huge reaction from heating up a rat from my colubrids too. The heat releases good scents. It's like offering a warm cookie fresh from the oven instead of one thats been sitting on the counter for a week. It wouldn't be an accurate way of testing a BPs thermoreception.
Accuracy or strikes in a dark room of a heated vs. unheated rat might give a better indication.

it looks axanthic

My goodness, this post sure did bring out a lot of different opinions.

Me personally, I've seen this picture before and I just love this snake. I'd own one in a heartbeat.

I don't see any reason not to breed it IF and only IF it doesn't have any serious health problems that should not be perpetuated. But if it is simply a case of, I don't like the way it lookd so I think it should not be bred, that is a personal opinion and you are entitled to yours as I am mine.

If this animal proves to have health problems due to it's unique condition, then I strongly agree it should not be bred knowing it is only going to pass on these problems to it's offspring. If it lives a normal healthy life, then I hope they do produce more, maybe then I can have one someday.

And as far as people spending huge amount of money on the offspring of this snake should it ever have any, why is that any different than people paying $10, $15, $20,000 or more to have the first of a new color morph? I've seen that happen regularly in the few months I've been here. If they like the snake and have the money to spend, what is it to you?

Personally I do not like the Champagnes at all. I've seen them and the different combo morphs made with it and I personally wouldn't own any of them if you gave it to me, even if there are plenty of people willing to pay $6-10,000 for one. It's the same thing really. There will always be people willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money to be the first to own a new anything, snake or otherwise.

Gale

She died in 2009 at around the 1100g range. Eugene still has the parents that produced her and is still breeding them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprinkles_Mum

of course we are scaleless lol..weve never had them...
moles , which are almost hairless are like that in the wild,
its an evolution thing.

im just not too into changing and playing around with genetics to the point where you are changing the basics of an animal. snakes have scales. cats have fur. humans have hair. thats just the hippy in me talking I guess.

it has nothing to do with being scared or not understanding etc to me. it just is not a snake to me. its just a silly project to change something thats already fine.

---

Your statement doesn't make a lot of sense in that you don't believe a scaleless should be bred and more produced if it is even possible, because you have a problem with people messing with the genetics and so on...how do you explain all of the different morphs already in existence by doing this EXACT same thing??

This is what we do when we breed snakes. we take their specific genes, mix and match and come up with something we hope is totally new. there are TONS and tons of morphs that could almost certainly have no chance of ever being produced in nature. This is just another one of those morphs.

Personally, I think it's beautiful. I would love to breed these and produce scaleless morphs. If the female lived to adulthood and was healthy, then hopefully no bad genetic disorders comes with being scaleless.

The scaleless Texas Rat Snake don't seem to posses major problems with its loss of scales. Mutations are natural, though not always survivable in the wild. Fortunately there's captivity.

Can't wait to see another one pop up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FIREball

She died in 2009 at around the 1100g range. Eugene still has the parents that produced her and is still breeding them.

---

Like I said Before, I think reptiles are born with scales for a reason. Though I do not know if not having scales had a single thing to do with her death, I think that it did. I guess time will tell if more are produced. Who knows, the snake may have been in pain its whole life.

Also, someone mentioned dogs and having a defect with only one eye? First off, dogs are mammals, not reptiles, and Two, I do not know many people who would pay thousands of dollars and try to breed for one eyed dogs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadLegs

Your statement doesn't make a lot of sense in that you don't believe a scaleless should be bred and more produced if it is even possible, because you have a problem with people messing with the genetics and so on...how do you explain all of the different morphs already in existence by doing this EXACT same thing??

This is what we do when we breed snakes. we take their specific genes, mix and match and come up with something we hope is totally new. there are TONS and tons of morphs that could almost certainly have no chance of ever being produced in nature. This is just another one of those morphs.

---

Are you comparing the change of patterns/colors to the change of having scales or not? The difference doesnt make since to you? You are confusing Mutations with Genetic defects.

Someone compared it before to how albino boas are likely to be born without eyes, and you do not see people wanted to breed for those.

That can't be real... Maybe a mutation that gives it EXTRA small scales?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardedragon

Are you comparing the change of patterns/colors to the change of having scales or not? The difference doesnt make since to you? You are confusing Mutations with Genetic defects.

Someone compared it before to how albino boas are likely to be born without eyes, and you do not see people wanted to breed for those.

---

To call it a genetic "defect" is to assume that there is something wrong with it like, as you said, missing an eye or in the case of some super caramel's, a kinked spine. simply being born scaleless, I do not see as a genetic defect. this particular specimen having died young does not mean that it was due to the fact that it was born without scales. no one can know that until it is reproduced and proven to be the cause of a health issue.

if that were the case, scaleless rat snakes would have the same mortality issue which i've yet to hear of. same goes for "leatherback" bearded dragons. they're technically scaleless and there is no evidence that this is a genetic "defect" that causes them harm or early mortality.